2010 regulation row on £40m budget cap

[mcdenife]

Ferrari face legal action if they quit F1
Ferrari may be open to legal action from Bernie Ecclestone, the sport's commercial rights holder, if they quit Formula One
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motors ... it-F1.html

Hence the court cases. Win or lose, these are just to establish a legal basis for leaving.

Especially in the context of this comment:

A spokesman said: "We are not worried. The court recognised the validity of the Concorde Agreement and we are now deciding whether or not to continue with our legal action. We are hoping it will not come to this and that we can find a way forward.

[Chaparral]

What gcdugas says

[mcdenife]

gcdugas, what you said is beginning to make me think perhaps there is more to Ron's move away from the Mclaren F1 to Mclaren Automotive....just a thought.

[ISLAMATRON]

gcdugas is totally off the mark

Yeah, just a "little brute force, so what?" Well now I see what you mean by "majority voting". Adolph, er Max says: "comply or else" to my "voluntary budget cap". Even Tony Soprano is more diplomatic than that. And we can all just ignore the budget ideas that all ten teams agreed with in their FOTA proposals because only "FIA initiatives get things moving in F1." After all, what is a little "brute force" among good friends anyway?

The FIA agreed to and adopted all the cost cutting FOTA proposals, limiting & banning testing, 8 engine rule, refueling ban, etc... please read
http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/ ... /8768.html
http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/ ... /8773.html

So the glide path had already started and Honda still left... The FIA had no choice but to protect F1 from a mass exodus of the manufacturers, and to do something to attract new teams to the formula.

since my memory is so short, could you tell me what the FIA's previous policy was towards new team entering F1? I seem to recall something about a $48M bond being required by the FIA but my "memory if short" so I could be wrong. Please fill me in and refresh my memory as to the FIA's previous "barrier free" welcoming posture towards new entrants.

The $48M is an old rule that is left over from the times when costs were much lower and a bunch of teams couldnt reach the 107% qualifying rule. The FIA had dropped that requirement by the time Prodrive was to enter the sport before the teams killed that with their customer car stance which could very well also kill off STR an was a problem for SAR.

souls may have noticed a new term that has emerged in the negotiations... "glide path". This can only mean that the FIA is moving away from its 40M euro figure and plan to introduce a stepped reduction leading to that figure in a year or two. I don't know... I think the teams are fed up with Max's "initiatives" and have little interest in a "watered down" 40M eruo low tech series of spec racers even if it comes in 2012 or later. Ferrari certainly don't. Audi has spent well more than that on its diesel endurance racers, as has Peugeot.

If Max is hell bent on watering down F1, then there will be a shift to LMP as the "new pinnacle of motorsports" and he will forever be known as the man who destroyed F1. It wasn't all that long ago that LMP had more cache than F1 anyway. I would say that F1 had less cache than LMP up until Renault introduced the turbo era. Coincidentally the rich playboy Cosworth kit car "garagista" era ended and the manufacturer era ensued until the present time. Nothing says that this process couldn't reverse itself again if Max drives out the manufacturers with his vision of a low tech el-cheapo spec racer series. LeMans still has plenty of cache and would provide a tempting marketing alternative for manufacturers with well staffed racing departments and huge capital investments in wind tunnels etc. Remember, under Max's great leadership, WRC which was an ascendant series just a few years ago, has seen a great exodus of major players. It is now a series in decline.

If you have actually looked into the 2010 rules you would see that the rules for the capped teams are much less restricted than any rules package in the last 15 years at least.

[RacingManiac]

To me it appears as if Ferrari will not get a whole lot of support with their threat to walk away. According to Mario Theissen who was doing a great job in the previous crisis with the GPMA all teams accept that a form of resource or budget cap needs to be found. He thinks it is acceptable to the big manufacturers, its policeable and Norbert Haug agrees with that. So as allways with money it is down to the question of how much.

The problem of contention I think is not budget cap in itself, its the whole 2-tier series that they will impose on the non-Cap team. Even the supporter of the cap system like Williams have reservation about the 2-tier series, and BMW is strongly against it because they know from their WTCC experience how much the equivalency can sway the competitiveness of teams regardless of their technical excellence. Who will want to see some random F3-to-F1 team beating the likes of the OEMs day in and day out because they are allowed much more technical freedom than the OEMs do? You are in the end being beaten by sentences in the rule book rather than actual performance achieved by your competitor. And really who can really trust FIA to be completely fair and impartial to the formation and adjustment of the equivalency just to favor side of their interest? And look at how much of a mess the whole Double Diffuser saga has been, with just one rule book in 2009, how do you expect a 2 -tier system be observed and clarified properly?

And then there is the whole issue of the quality of the new teams. How many of them are actually at F1 caliber? Would they have entered if they weren't expecting to get ridiculous amount of dispensation in performance over the OEMs(at a relatively low price)? While its cool for someone like Lola or Wirth Engineering to try to flex their creative muscle and leverage their experience trying to make a F1 car, afterall they have proven knowhow to do so, how am I supposed to believe someone from a single make series like GP2 and a primarily customer series like F3 to actually progress from user to designer in less than one year?

[mcdenife]

If you have actually looked into the 2010 rules you would see that the rules for the capped teams are much less restricted than any rules package in the last 15 years at least.

That may well be but you missed one of the key points he implied, the right of the FIA to unilaterally change and impose rules. The fact is this kind of attitude cost the team millions. How can they have any confidence that what little they do invest whether in technology or whatever will not be unilaterally ruled against as and when it pleases the FIA.

[timbo]

So the glide path had already started and Honda still left... The FIA had no choice but to protect F1 from a mass exodus of the manufacturers, and to do something to attract new teams to the formula.

Yeah, kinda eutanasic solution. To protect F1 from mass-exodus of manufacturers FIA impose rules that makes three of the manufacturers wish to leave F1.

The $48M is an old rule that is left over from the times when costs were much lower and a bunch of teams couldnt reach the 107% qualifying rule. The FIA had dropped that requirement by the time Prodrive was to enter the sport before the teams killed that with their customer car stance which could very well also kill off STR an was a problem for SAR.

Are you sure that iSport would meat 107% right from the start?

If you have actually looked into the 2010 rules you would see that the rules for the capped teams are much less restricted than any rules package in the last 15 years at least.

How long will that stand? If everybody agrees to be budget-capped how long will it take Max to regulate that?

PS And I don't see much technical freedom in the regulations.

[Chaparral]

If you have actually looked into the 2010 rules you would see that the rules for the capped teams are much less restricted than any rules package in the last 15 years at least.

Ive seen the proposed rules for 2010 and thats just a crap uninformed comment ISLAMATRON - the uncapped rules with unlimited testing, wind tunnel time, unlimited gain with the power plant etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc thats just B/S - on a 40 mil budget it aint going to happen and anyone would know that - this is absolute frog ---! This is again about the Ernie & Bert show manipulating the show to suit themselves and their individual positions - I really hope Ferrari hold their ground and quit despite Ecclestone saying today that if they quit they are possibly liable to reimburse him for the monies paid after the concorde agreement ran out - I think Ferrari are smarter than that (note I am not a fan of those damm red cars so am not in any way a fan of the team) - I dont know but in the last few years especially this whole game has turned into a soap opera and to be honest Im over it - it has nothing to do with the most central of things - the racing itself. This year we have come closer to the real thing in a decade where innovation is rearing its head (even with the restrictive regs) and here we have Bert & Ernie trying to --- it up - yet again for their own gain

[ISLAMATRON]

If you have actually looked into the 2010 rules you would see that the rules for the capped teams are much less restricted than any rules package in the last 15 years at least.

Ive seen the proposed rules for 2010 and thats just a crap uninformed comment ISLAMATRON - the uncapped rules with unlimited testing, wind tunnel time, unlimited gain with the power plant etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc thats just B/S - on a 40 mil budget it aint going to happen and anyone would know that - this is absolute frog ---!

It has been passed for 2010 and is therefore the rule.. so what makes it "frog ---"? of course there is only so much testing that can be done under a 40 mil pound budget, but it is still less restrictive than the rules stipulating what scale model you can use in what speed wind tunnel for how many hours a week. If a team prefers wind tunnel spending rather than on track than under the cap they can do it... or vice versa, as it stands the teams can only road test 15K miles in between seasons... that will also change under the cap... as will engine usage rules, no engine rev limit and MOVEABLE WINGS FRONT & REAR, Also all wheel drive and all wheel KERS, with unlimited power in.

[ISLAMATRON]

If you have actually looked into the 2010 rules you would see that the rules for the capped teams are much less restricted than any rules package in the last 15 years at least.

How long will that stand? If everybody agrees to be budget-capped how long will it take Max to regulate that?

PS And I don't see much technical freedom in the regulations.

No doubt that as speeds increase Mad MAx will definitely try to reign them in, but it seems with a different approach than the stifling technical rules boxes of the past... but who knows. He might again turn down the revs, or maybe the fuel flow, but those reasonable of us seem to understand that the speeds must be controlled, we just would like it done in a way that wouldnt stifle technological innovation, removing all the stupid winglets was fine with me.

[gridwalker]

How can they have any confidence that what little they do invest whether in technology or whatever will not be unilaterally ruled against as and when it pleases the FIA.

They can't, because that happens anyway regardless of how much the technology costs.

Case in point : Renault's mass damper system.

[jddh1]

The FOTA meeting on Flav's yacht is now over and the teams are meeting with Spanky. What is interesting to me is that The Bernie was present at the FOTA meeting, sitting right next to Flav.

Is The Bernie now taking sides with FOTA in regards to the low cap, or was he there to plant the seed for a FOTA break? Any other ideas as to why his attendance there? Probably he's just protecting his and CVC's investment.

[mcdenife]

How can they have any confidence that what little they do invest whether in technology or whatever will not be unilaterally ruled against as and when it pleases the FIA.

They can't, because that happens anyway regardless of how much the technology costs.

Case in point : Renault's mass damper system.

This was/is different as it was not a change in regulation but a ruling (which I totally disagreed with) just as with the DD. The one that comes close I think was the Michelin front tire issue. That was a change in the interpretation and hence a change in regs. Which of course meant that michelin had to redesign the tire and their teams had pound around testing the new tire burning some more banknotes in the process. No, what I meant was a team spends dollares on some new rig or design tool only for the FIA to again ban it, without consultation, in the name of cost cutting. Sometimes I think they should be made to reimburse teams for things like this maybe then they will think first and act later.

[andartop]

The FIA had no choice but to protect F1 from a mass exodus of the manufacturers..

Headline: TEAMS AGREE TO EXIT F1
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/n ... 1814.shtml

=D>

[sticky667]

All ten teams threaten to withhold their entries for 2010. Game On. Who'll blink first?

Only Campos Racing and USGPE have entered thus far